AT&T is lucky to be in the opposite position. They can focus on improving 3G footprint and using that to leverage the 4G transition. Since T-Mo has the red-headed step-child frequencies for 3G, AT&T is the de-facto go-to wireless provider for non-phone devices and a lot of phones as well. I would hate to be a VZ shareholder right now. Even subsidized multi-protocol chips won't save them at this point.
I wonder if AT&T is rolling out 4G capable towers now where they need to improve their 3G footprint? They can see it's coming, why not just skip ahead where they are adding coverage?
You are assuming that the carriers will just give these micro-sims to you. The carriers are just going to sell you e-readers with their micro-sims built-in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh
The problem is that despite offering better service, they will lag significantly as more devices like the Kindle, Nook, and (max)iPad come out. Single product, global reach wins for a global product. I don't think Wall St. will give them three more years to lose in this space, which will surely place them as the second largest carrier. The reality is they need to get things working faster to avoid losing their position.
But Verizon isn't really losing the subscriber war --- VZW is still pulling higher postpaid net adds than AT&T Wireless. Counting SIM cards is a dubious statistical exercise --- especially the prepaid ones.
my point was that t-mobile seems to offer 3G for the sidekick (850 MHz;900 MHz;1800 MHz;1900 MHz)
and
the G1 (850 MHz;900 MHz;1800 MHz;1900 MHz) -
stating the Capabilities: Quickly connect to the Internet via the 3G network anywhere within the T-Mobile USA 3G network."
and "3G Network and Wi-Fi access: High-speed 3G network connection for surfing the web or downloading information quickly and effortlessly or seamlessly transition to open Wi-Fi networks to surf the web or download information quickly".
So there must be some non-1700mHz T-mobile 3G network.
You are assuming that the carriers will just give these micro-sims to you. The carriers are just going to sell you e-readers with their micro-sims built-in.
But Verizon isn't really losing the subscriber war --- VZW is still pulling higher postpaid net adds than AT&T Wireless. Counting SIM cards is a dubious statistical exercise --- especially the prepaid ones.
I totally agree with you that At&t may be the only one willing to play.
If the others don't want to join in, I should blame them, not Apple or AT&T
The problem is that despite offering better service, they will lag significantly as more devices like the Kindle, Nook, and (max)iPad come out. Single product, global reach wins for a global product. I don't think Wall St. will give them three more years to lose in this space, which will surely place them as the second largest carrier. The reality is they need to get things working faster to avoid losing their position.
AT&T is lucky to be in the opposite position. They can focus on improving 3G footprint and using that to leverage the 4G transition. Since T-Mo has the red-headed step-child frequencies for 3G, AT&T is the de-facto go-to wireless provider for non-phone devices and a lot of phones as well. I would hate to be a VZ shareholder right now. Even subsidized multi-protocol chips won't save them at this point.
Sprint is going to be interesting to watch... they need to get into the pure bandwidth business pretty soon to save themselves.
That's good to know. I assumed SJ was sticking with AT&T for good reasons. I wonder if Apple might not invest in AT&T to help the process forward?
my point was that t-mobile seems to offer 3G for the sidekick (850 MHz;900 MHz;1800 MHz;1900 MHz)
and
the G1 (850 MHz;900 MHz;1800 MHz;1900 MHz) -
stating the Capabilities: Quickly connect to the Internet via the 3G network anywhere within the T-Mobile USA 3G network."
and "3G Network and Wi-Fi access: High-speed 3G network connection for surfing the web or downloading information quickly and effortlessly or seamlessly transition to open Wi-Fi networks to surf the web or download information quickly".
So there must be some non-1700mHz T-mobile 3G network.
The frequencies you list for the sidekick are the 2G frequency set; both the Sidekick and G1 have a standard quadband 2G GSM radio baseband. 3G frequencies are in similar bands, but use a very different over the air encoding. There are about 14 3G or UMTS frequencies in use. You will see them listed either by band number or by frequency. T-Mobile 3G devices are usually UMTS band 1, 4, and 8. - Bands 1 and 8 used in Europe and Asia, band 4 is unique to T-mobile in the US.This makes sense as T-Mobile is as subsidiary of Deutch Telecom, and they want the phones to work in Europe on their network there. As far as I know, T-Mobile has no infrastructure on 3G bands 2 or 5 in the US.
Devices sold by ATT or for ATT normally contain the standard 2G quadband plus UMTS 1, 2, and 5. Band 1 allows use in Europe, while bands 2, and 5 are used by ATT in the US. The iPad has this set of bands, so does 3G only on ATT in the US (Rogers in Canada).
To have complete 3G coverage, you would need a transmitter/receiver pair for all allocated UMTS frequencies - but this is not practical due to battery size, phone size, and antenna requirements. To cover most countries and GSM service providers, you would need at a minimum a band 1, 2, 4, 5, 8 phone. We are about to get some practical chips that could do this at a reasonable price, but they are not available today.
However, note that there is not a lot of demand for five band phone. Most people only use a phone on a single carrier. The real push comes from having fewer stock keeping units and production lines for manufacturers. Effectively, the cost savings from lower manufacturing cost has to out weigh the addition cost to design and build a five band device. The trade off of more bands is shorter battery life. US Carriers of course really do not like the idea of a device that can be trivially ported to another carrier, hence the incredible Balkanization of the US market. Carriers will probably prevent most manufacturers from offering such a device in the US.
My guess is Apple will be the first, as there is only one customer that matters to Apple - Steve Jobs. A five band iPhone and iPad would fit well with his idea of "it just works."
Please do not underestimate the amount of work it takes to create a cell phone; if you really knew how difficult it is, you would be amazed that we can get them to work at all?.
In September 2006, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) offered, at auction, licenses in the first Advanced Wireless Services band. This band was an area of wireless spectrum, half in the 1700 MHz (1.7 GHz) and half in the 2100 MHz (2.1 GHz) frequencies...T-Mobile gained nationwide coverage of 1.7 GHz and 2.1 GHz, with numerous areas being supplemented with addition licenses. Examples include New York City, Chicago, and Boston where T-Mobile acquired one-third (33%) of the available spectrum, or San Francisco, Houston, and Miami where they acquired 45% of the available spectrum.[1}"
In September 2006, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) offered, at auction, licenses in the first Advanced Wireless Services band. This band was an area of wireless spectrum, half in the 1700 MHz (1.7 GHz) and half in the 2100 MHz (2.1 GHz) frequencies...T-Mobile gained nationwide coverage of 1.7 GHz and 2.1 GHz, with numerous areas being supplemented with addition licenses. Examples include New York City, Chicago, and Boston where T-Mobile acquired one-third (33%) of the available spectrum, or San Francisco, Houston, and Miami where they acquired 45% of the available spectrum.[1}"
It means that AWS has the uplink and downlink channels in separate spectrum space --- i.e. uplink at 1700 MHz and downlink at 2100 MHz. It means that normal 3G phones cannot function on the T-Mobile network.
Comments
Attention! Attention! T-Mobile is selling Cellular data devices that don't work on its own network.
http://www.t-mobile.com/shop/phones/...t-Laptop-Stick
Here are the details of this device:
Band (frequency)
Communication
3G Capable
Wi-Fi Connection Management
EDGE & Wi-Fi*
Oh my gosh!!! no mention of 1700mHz. How can that be?!?
Band IV (AWS) refers to 1700MHz UMTS. The stick is 5-band UMTS.
Interesting. I was about to obnoxiously point out the 1700 MHz thing.
I'll just keep my mouth shut now.
UMTS Band IV is 1700mHz, so you can obnoxiously point that out if you wish. Or, just point it out nicely, which is way cooler.
Edit: D'oh...aaarrrgggh beat me to it. I guess a refresh was in order.
Good Morning LTMP and I hope you are enjoying the canadian winter.
What are the compatible GSM carriers in Canada?
There is one - Rogers - but I think one or two others are getting into it, like Telus and Bell maybe?
AT&T is lucky to be in the opposite position. They can focus on improving 3G footprint and using that to leverage the 4G transition. Since T-Mo has the red-headed step-child frequencies for 3G, AT&T is the de-facto go-to wireless provider for non-phone devices and a lot of phones as well. I would hate to be a VZ shareholder right now. Even subsidized multi-protocol chips won't save them at this point.
I wonder if AT&T is rolling out 4G capable towers now where they need to improve their 3G footprint? They can see it's coming, why not just skip ahead where they are adding coverage?
unlocked means unlocked.
any GSM Micro-Sim means any GSM Micro-Sim.
You are assuming that the carriers will just give these micro-sims to you. The carriers are just going to sell you e-readers with their micro-sims built-in.
The problem is that despite offering better service, they will lag significantly as more devices like the Kindle, Nook, and (max)iPad come out. Single product, global reach wins for a global product. I don't think Wall St. will give them three more years to lose in this space, which will surely place them as the second largest carrier. The reality is they need to get things working faster to avoid losing their position.
But Verizon isn't really losing the subscriber war --- VZW is still pulling higher postpaid net adds than AT&T Wireless. Counting SIM cards is a dubious statistical exercise --- especially the prepaid ones.
and
the G1 (850 MHz;900 MHz;1800 MHz;1900 MHz) -
stating the Capabilities: Quickly connect to the Internet via the 3G network anywhere within the T-Mobile USA 3G network."
and "3G Network and Wi-Fi access: High-speed 3G network connection for surfing the web or downloading information quickly and effortlessly or seamlessly transition to open Wi-Fi networks to surf the web or download information quickly".
So there must be some non-1700mHz T-mobile 3G network.
You are assuming that the carriers will just give these micro-sims to you. The carriers are just going to sell you e-readers with their micro-sims built-in.
But Verizon isn't really losing the subscriber war --- VZW is still pulling higher postpaid net adds than AT&T Wireless. Counting SIM cards is a dubious statistical exercise --- especially the prepaid ones.
I totally agree with you that At&t may be the only one willing to play.
If the others don't want to join in, I should blame them, not Apple or AT&T
UMTS Band IV is 1700mHz, so you can obnoxiously point that out if you wish. Or, just point it out nicely, which is way cooler.
Edit: D'oh...aaarrrgggh beat me to it. I guess a refresh was in order.
Don't worry about it, aaarrrgggh got me too.
The problem is that despite offering better service, they will lag significantly as more devices like the Kindle, Nook, and (max)iPad come out. Single product, global reach wins for a global product. I don't think Wall St. will give them three more years to lose in this space, which will surely place them as the second largest carrier. The reality is they need to get things working faster to avoid losing their position.
AT&T is lucky to be in the opposite position. They can focus on improving 3G footprint and using that to leverage the 4G transition. Since T-Mo has the red-headed step-child frequencies for 3G, AT&T is the de-facto go-to wireless provider for non-phone devices and a lot of phones as well. I would hate to be a VZ shareholder right now. Even subsidized multi-protocol chips won't save them at this point.
Sprint is going to be interesting to watch... they need to get into the pure bandwidth business pretty soon to save themselves.
That's good to know. I assumed SJ was sticking with AT&T for good reasons. I wonder if Apple might not invest in AT&T to help the process forward?
my point was that t-mobile seems to offer 3G for the sidekick (850 MHz;900 MHz;1800 MHz;1900 MHz)
and
the G1 (850 MHz;900 MHz;1800 MHz;1900 MHz) -
stating the Capabilities: Quickly connect to the Internet via the 3G network anywhere within the T-Mobile USA 3G network."
and "3G Network and Wi-Fi access: High-speed 3G network connection for surfing the web or downloading information quickly and effortlessly or seamlessly transition to open Wi-Fi networks to surf the web or download information quickly".
So there must be some non-1700mHz T-mobile 3G network.
The frequencies you list for the sidekick are the 2G frequency set; both the Sidekick and G1 have a standard quadband 2G GSM radio baseband. 3G frequencies are in similar bands, but use a very different over the air encoding. There are about 14 3G or UMTS frequencies in use. You will see them listed either by band number or by frequency. T-Mobile 3G devices are usually UMTS band 1, 4, and 8. - Bands 1 and 8 used in Europe and Asia, band 4 is unique to T-mobile in the US.This makes sense as T-Mobile is as subsidiary of Deutch Telecom, and they want the phones to work in Europe on their network there. As far as I know, T-Mobile has no infrastructure on 3G bands 2 or 5 in the US.
Devices sold by ATT or for ATT normally contain the standard 2G quadband plus UMTS 1, 2, and 5. Band 1 allows use in Europe, while bands 2, and 5 are used by ATT in the US. The iPad has this set of bands, so does 3G only on ATT in the US (Rogers in Canada).
To have complete 3G coverage, you would need a transmitter/receiver pair for all allocated UMTS frequencies - but this is not practical due to battery size, phone size, and antenna requirements. To cover most countries and GSM service providers, you would need at a minimum a band 1, 2, 4, 5, 8 phone. We are about to get some practical chips that could do this at a reasonable price, but they are not available today.
However, note that there is not a lot of demand for five band phone. Most people only use a phone on a single carrier. The real push comes from having fewer stock keeping units and production lines for manufacturers. Effectively, the cost savings from lower manufacturing cost has to out weigh the addition cost to design and build a five band device. The trade off of more bands is shorter battery life. US Carriers of course really do not like the idea of a device that can be trivially ported to another carrier, hence the incredible Balkanization of the US market. Carriers will probably prevent most manufacturers from offering such a device in the US.
My guess is Apple will be the first, as there is only one customer that matters to Apple - Steve Jobs. A five band iPhone and iPad would fit well with his idea of "it just works."
Please do not underestimate the amount of work it takes to create a cell phone; if you really knew how difficult it is, you would be amazed that we can get them to work at all?.
what about Cincinnati Bell Wireless (was 20% cingular, but now independent). They offer 3G for the Cincinnati metro area.
Cincinnati Bell Wireless runs it's 3G service in the same frequency as T-mobile, 1700 mHz.
"3G upgrade
In September 2006, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) offered, at auction, licenses in the first Advanced Wireless Services band. This band was an area of wireless spectrum, half in the 1700 MHz (1.7 GHz) and half in the 2100 MHz (2.1 GHz) frequencies...T-Mobile gained nationwide coverage of 1.7 GHz and 2.1 GHz, with numerous areas being supplemented with addition licenses. Examples include New York City, Chicago, and Boston where T-Mobile acquired one-third (33%) of the available spectrum, or San Francisco, Houston, and Miami where they acquired 45% of the available spectrum.[1}"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-Mobile_(USA)
and the ipad does support 2100mHz.
But T-mobile also has
"3G upgrade
In September 2006, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) offered, at auction, licenses in the first Advanced Wireless Services band. This band was an area of wireless spectrum, half in the 1700 MHz (1.7 GHz) and half in the 2100 MHz (2.1 GHz) frequencies...T-Mobile gained nationwide coverage of 1.7 GHz and 2.1 GHz, with numerous areas being supplemented with addition licenses. Examples include New York City, Chicago, and Boston where T-Mobile acquired one-third (33%) of the available spectrum, or San Francisco, Houston, and Miami where they acquired 45% of the available spectrum.[1}"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-Mobile_(USA)
and the ipad does support 2100mHz.
It means that AWS has the uplink and downlink channels in separate spectrum space --- i.e. uplink at 1700 MHz and downlink at 2100 MHz. It means that normal 3G phones cannot function on the T-Mobile network.